PixlBit

I played a few minutes, and didn't like it, so I said so, and an entry in the series was mentioned in a negative light in your blog, so I just said "yeah, I didn't like what I've played of the series, either.". Then you said there were a few games you can't judge after playing only a few minutes, I offered you an olive branch and said that was fair because I hadn't played much of the game.

You mentioned a series, I commented on my experiences with it. That's it! You're taking this a bit more seriously than it needs to be taken. It was a comment about a game you mentioned I didn't happen to enjoy. I'm not getting why it's such a huge deal.

I didn't trash it, I just said I played a few minutes, didn't enjoy it, and felt fine with putting another game back in since I didn't enjoy it.

I stated an opinion that wasn't in line with yours, that's not the same as trashing something; I literally typed two sentences, saying I just preferred another game at the time.

Not disagreeing, I just tend to prefer games I can pick up and get into right away in general.

I've given JRPGs very fair shakes, as in logged hours into them, but they're just not my thing, and I'm not always willing to log hours in to find out something is just not my thing, especially if it's a long work week.

If I get another chance, I'll try again for longer, but that doesn't guarantee I'll enjoy it.

That's why I said I'd take your word for it. Might have been in a boring part, whatever, I just wanted to go back to SF.

Transparency was my favorite.

Also, I responded to you on your last blog. I still disagree that we disagreed. lol

No, I read them again, and I never actually disagreed with much of what you said.

I said games that suck as games trying to tell a cinematic story may as well be movies, I just liked some games that were able to juggle both well or tell their story through gameplay.

Your response was that you wouldn't consider Bioshock and SotC in that category of bad cinematic-style  games (I agree, their stories are told through gameplay) and that the problem was not that they were cinematic stories, but that cutscenes and quicktime events were too frequent. Nothing I said disagreed with that. I said I liked games that balance cinematics and gameplay well, obviously too many cinematics or quicktime events would be unbalanced.

I said that art is subjective, but acknowledged that games had a disproportionate ratio of art to trashy games when compared with other mediums.

You basically said the same.

I said I was fine with graphics being updated, as long as gameplay didn't suffer.

You said your point in the article was that gameplay and depth should not be sacrificed for prettier visuals. I never disagreed with that, I said roughly the same.

The last point we actually agree on as well, I am a callous asshole. lol

I think it might have been AC2 that I played actually, but not for long, so I'll take your word for it.

Funny thing about Oklahoma ... I know what you mean. Not to be rude, but I don't have much fondness for the state, because of my experiences passing through and some of the people I've met. Some people from there are great, like you, and my friends have said they had good times in Oklahoma City, don't get me wrong, but overall? Let's move on. lol

I don't like our state government all that much either, frankly, but last year I was in Dallas, Nacogdoches, Houston, and Austin, and had a blast; especially in Austin, there's so much to do!

Especially if you love music; we were eating stuff from a Coolhaus trailer, and across the street they were having a karaoke contest for opera singers!

Yeah, if I were a parent, I'd probably tell my kids to do the opposite of whatever those two said to do as well. lol

I only played an AC game once; I got bored, and asked that we pop Street Fighter II: Turbo back in. As far as I'm concerned, that was the right decision.